RTG's Caribbean 21 lie

[toofast4u]

Would those calls have been from Greg Rollins of Virtual Casino?

Cipher

No, it was from 5 Roses casino, made some pretty pathetic threats to me. I was like 'bring it on beeyotch'

 

[gamblinboi]

Dean from Phoenician casino (Which recently sent out a promo advertising that Caribbean 21 is now back online at www.phoeniciancasino.com ) has made a very good post at WOL about Caribbean 21 and also PirateofC21 's play at Phoenician.


Phoenician casino saw NO problems with Pirate's play.
Phoenician casino does not believe Pirate used a bot.
Phoenician casino stated that Pirate's play wasn't even perfect.
Phoenician casino PAYED Pirate his winnings (and I bet they payed fast, too).

see it for yourself:

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

That makes RTG as WELL as another REPUTABLE online RTG casino publically state that PirateofC21's play was LEGIT and his win was LEGIT.

Hampton does NOT have a leg to stand on and should PAY THE PLAYER.

 

[jetset]

I too found the Phoenician post gave an interesting view:

"I would also like to add we paid brian ( the pirate of the caribbean ) all the money he won from our casino and did not have any issue with his play. I also emailed him and let him know when the game comes back online that he can feel welcome playing at our casino. Previous to all these problems going down brian and i had ( and still have ) a good relationship.

"As far as commenting about Hamptons - you must realize i have to be diplomatic about this and the only thing i can really add to what i have said above ( ie we paid the player and welcome him back ) is if a casino is prepared to raise limits then they need to be prepared to pay. What were they thinking as they were watching his play go from 200k to 300k to 400k etc it was their decision to chase the losses and now they have to deal with it. However if he did use a bot and it is against their terms then that raises another issue which they now have to deal with not me . I personally dont think he used a bot and even if he did it is not set to perfect play so go figure. The game itself is a pretty aggresive sort of game and if you get on a good run you can do some damage either way.

"If you are offended by my ad then i do apologize , i did authorize it , i did know of the connection with the PC21 but i would hope you can view it in the context of what i have said above."

 

[portia]

Phoenecian post is outstanding.

Bryan they need to be recognized for being a first class operation.

An RTG sw powered casino with a sensible management.

I don't see any problem with the ad. They paid Pc21. They need to get the message out to the gambling community.

 

[aceinhole21]

I had the following conversation with Hamptons support online. There is nothing significant here, but I guess I am trying to say that players should keep the heat on them and not forget about this.

Please wait for a site operator to respond.
You are now chatting with 'Josh'
Josh: Hello, how may we help you today?
you: hello
you: want to ask why the Pirate hasn't gotten paid?
Josh: forgive me but I do not seem to understand your question
Josh: May I please have your user name?
you: the guy who won 1.3 million dollars
you: I'm not sure I should play at this casino, i mean how can i be guaranteed to get paid?
Josh: I do not have any information on that. This is a serious enterprise, our custumers get paid when they win
you: well it is all over the message boards that someone won 1.3 million dollars but didnt get paid. is that not true?
Josh: As I stated before, I have no information whatsoever on that
you: Ok no problem. Thanks
Josh: My pleasure indeed, have a great night

 

[tricon11]

I applaud Phoenician Casino. They have definitely distanced themselves from Hampton Casino with that post.

You have to give them credit for standing up for what they feel was right.

Dean stated, What were they thinking as they were watching his play go from 200k to 300k to 400k etc it was their decision to chase the losses and now they have to deal with it.

So thats one RTG casino willing to take a stand. Will Delano and the others follow?

 

[cipher]

Phoenecian post is outstanding.

Bryan they need to be recognized for being a first class operation.

An RTG sw powered casino with a sensible management.

I don't see any problem with the ad. They paid Pc21. They need to get the message out to the gambling community.

I would certainly hav't to second PORTIA's motion that the Phoenician be recognized as a first class operation. This is the third instance within the last 30 days that I've seen Dean Michaels jump right in the middle of a situation and tell it the way it is. I've got to add that one of those instances was while Dean was on vacation and he still got back to me. I've never recommended a RTG casino before but I'm recommending the Phoenician as long as Dean Michaels is running it.

 

[caruso]

Dean's comments on the Hampton matter itself are commendable.

Dean's use of the Pirate situation for his advertising campains and his profit is contemptible.

But then, I'm a deeply cynical player; it'll be a cold day in hell before any gambling operation successfully dupes me with deceipt or ad copy.

Fortunately for the industry, my kind are rare.

 

[portia]

ty Cipher.

You know Cipher, if this Delano's Casino and ah, what's the name of the other casino that owes Pc21 some cash?
(other than Hamptons - who just plain do not have the cash to pay)

Well, when those other RTG casinos that owe Pc21 his winnings, step forward and release his balances, they should also be considered for the highest recognition. Unless they act like they are paying grudgingly - as if it were beat out of them. But then that would be dumb - for a casino to make itself appear to be tight fisted and cheap.

Surely, if you are going to pay people who win you have got to be smart and follow Phoenecians example. Get as much marketing mileage out of it as you can. It would be a great assignment to write marketing copy for a casino who is paying off a winner as well known as this Pc21 has become.

This event is going to be etched in online gaming folklore and history.
And there doesn't have to be any losers, or bad guys, or bankrupts in that story - if all involved had the foresight of this Phoenecian casino and RTG.

Think Phoenecian Casino was also smart getting there marketing of the return of this game out there early (and it should be loud) 'cause when Delano's and the other casinos oweing money to the Player come thru with there payments they could eclipse the other casinos in publicity.

 

[portia]

Caruso : It is true that i am dupable. Always fall for a good sales pitch.

You know when they are hawking stuff, putting on the performance :

"You get the Bread Slicer, the pruning Knife the Ginsu knife , the steak knives, paring knife, fish cleaning knife and the orange juicer - all guaranteed for life - for just $29.99" I immediately am the first to reach for my cash, as if on cue, so that the barker can point at me and say : "Not so fast, hold on to your money for a second more. For $29.99 I'll thow in TWO of everything - today only." I'm all over it. "I'll take three sets"

In the online gaming world, let's cut the good guys who pay a little slack. I gave up on perfection a long time ago.

 

[dirk_dangerous]

Well, with all the recent comments by RTG and Phoenician, I'm going to have to take the side of the player on this now. It appears that Hampton screwed up. They raised the limits, hoping the player would lose and they got beat--plain and simple. Their excuses just don't wash IMO.

Hampton, I think you should settle this problem and move forward; unless you can present some solid evidence that shows the player cheated, you really don't have a leg to stand on. And for heaven's sake, don't raise your limits again.

 

[gamblinboi]

Hampton, I think you should settle this problem and move forward; unless you can present some solid evidence that shows the player cheated, you really don't have a leg to stand on. And for heaven's sake, don't raise your limits again.

dirk, there is no doubt anymore - there IS no solid evidence that he cheated cuz he DIDN'T. Phoenician, RTG BOTH state this. The play was LEGIT. HAMPTONS MUST PAY because there is NOTHING that they can present to change it - Pirate won FAIR and SQUARE.

 

[caruso]

Portia: I wasn't suggesting you're a dupe. I know you're no less cynical than me.

 

[SFeagleAgain]

Bravo to Phoenician! They have done the right thing and should be commended for their response to the player. They have turned what could have been a PR nightmare into a dream come true for their casino. I expect players to flock to them in droves for their efforts. Hampton and the others had better follow suit and fast. Time is running and the court of public opinion is definitely NOT in their favor. Kudos to all helping this guy collect his rightful winnings (and they know who they are).

 

[caruso]

Hee hee, from the C.M. newsletter:

"Lets look at an analogy to get a better understanding what is happening here. Let's say a casino forbids players from wearing a blue hat while playing the games: this is stated in the casino's terms and conditions - no blue hats to be worn while playing. Now let's say a player wins a million dollars at this casino, but says he wore a blue hat while playing. And then he changes his story saying that he never wore a hat of any color.

Is the casino liable to pay up? Does the casino have the right not to pay a player that wore a blue hat, even though most people feel the blue hat rule is a goofy-ass rule? I feel that the casino has a right not to pay, if it can show photographic evidence of the player wearing the blue hat. But there is no concrete evidence in this situation, no photos, no witnesses.

If the casino does not pay this player, it will always be remembered as "the casino that did not pay a player because of a stupid hat rule"."

LOL.

 

[gamblinboi]

Hee hee, from the C.M. newsletter:

"Lets look at an analogy to get a better understanding what is happening here. Let's say a casino forbids players from wearing a blue hat while playing the games: this is stated in the casino's terms and conditions - no blue hats to be worn while playing. Now let's say a player wins a million dollars at this casino, but says he wore a blue hat while playing. And then he changes his story saying that he never wore a hat of any color.

Is the casino liable to pay up? Does the casino have the right not to pay a player that wore a blue hat, even though most people feel the blue hat rule is a goofy-ass rule? I feel that the casino has a right not to pay, if it can show photographic evidence of the player wearing the blue hat. But there is no concrete evidence in this situation, no photos, no witnesses.

If the casino does not pay this player, it will always be remembered as "the casino that did not pay a player because of a stupid hat rule"."

LOL.

LOL indeed. CM i think you are a BIT off here. This isn't about any rules - Pirate didn't break any, by the admission of RTG and Phoenician Casino. This is about Hampton NOT WANTING TO PAY $1.3 MILLION ... if they don't pay, it'll forever be known as that RTG Casino that Stiffed a player out of 1.3 MILLION and tried every underhanded, lame-a*s bull*it excuse in the book to get out of paying its debt!

 

[Casinomeister]

Hi y'all,

Please PLEASE! Stop calling me C.M or CM. There is another webmaster who goes by this handle and it's super confusing. Casinomeister is one word by the way. I have no idea why people try to make it into two words all of the time.

CM i think you are a BIT off here. This isn't about any rules - Pirate didn't break any

The Pirate broke the rules in the the casino's opinion when he opened his mouth and said that he used a robot. This is on tape and has been broadcast everywhere but here, The breaking of the rule is clear and simple. Now whether or not this rule was ACTUALLY broken we'll probably never know.

What the bottom line is, can RTG tell its casinos what to do? Simple as that. Does RTG have the right to tell what the casino's rules are and what they aren't? Sure, RTG can pull the plug on a licensee, not let him renew their license or whatever, but still the issue is what can RTG dictate to the casino as in how to run their business(es).

 

[gamblinboi]

Hi y'all,

Please PLEASE! Stop calling me C.M or CM. There is another webmaster who goes by this handle and it's super confusing. Casinomeister is one word by the way. I have no idea why people try to make it into two words all of the time.



The Pirate broke the rules in the the casino's opinion when he opened his mouth and said that he used a robot. This is on tape and has been broadcast everywhere but here, The breaking of the rule is clear and simple. Now whether or not this rule was ACTUALLY broken we'll probably never know.

What the bottom line is, can RTG tell its casinos what to do? Simple as that. Does RTG have the right to tell what the casino's rules are and what they aren't? Sure, RTG can pull the plug on a licensee, not let him renew their license or whatever, but still the issue is what can RTG dictate to the casino as in how to run their business(es).

LOL i thought the OTHER CM wrote this, not CasinoMeister.

and What was on the tape was poppycock - the guy was obviously a bit more than flustered and was just trying to get info out of the casino. There was no robot, there was no cheating. RTG and Phoenician say this pretty much.

I'm having first hand experience with a casino right now that's deciding that I've somehow broken the rules (that rule being I won). They're on their THIRD excuse for not paying me now, so I know (kinda) how Pirate feels. At this point, I doubt i'll ever see my money from them. So why not play along and see what exactly they say - maybe it'll lead them to saying something completely stupid and CONTRADICTORY - just like in Pirate's case. HAmptons said they used RTG built in mouse movement detection stuff to find out that he used a robot. WRONG - there is no mouse tracking software in RTG. So by going along with this robot bullocks, Pirate shows that they are FULL of it.

The casino in my case is World Wide Vegas. I've been waiting for your replies on this matter, Dude but please let me go public as i think the analogy fits. They made up some BS about multiple deposits. This was so flat out wrong it only took them a day or two to come up with some other excuse, which was summarily dismissed and wrong again. THEN they come up with the ubiquitous i'm connected to other players bit. Which other players? How am I connected? What if I referred friends or family or even wrote on a forum like WOL - hey, check out this casino! Does that automatically give them the right to void my winnings? And finally, how would this even break their rules? By playing along with the casino, you can draw out information and PROVE that they are full of it. Exactly what Pirate did in this case, and it doesn't prove that he used a robot or broke their rules.

 

[caruso]

Sorry Bryan.

You can be sure that noone is going to confuse you any time soon with...(etc etc); If they do, I'll have something to say about it, LOL.

Sorry again.

(Gamblinboi, let's stay on track with Pirate here.)

 

[Casinomeister]

Gamblinboi,

If you want to address your issues with World Wide Vegas, please feel free to start a thread in the complaints section. Let's stay on track here. I'm sure there are a number of individuals that would like to see this thread derailed. Let's not do this. Thanks!

 

[gamblinboi]

Gamblinboi,

If you want to address your issues with World Wide Vegas, please feel free to start a thread in the complaints section. Let's stay on track here. I'm sure there are a number of individuals that would like to see this thread derailed. Let's not do this. Thanks!

My bad, folks. But the point remains - this guy was merely grabbing info from Hamptons by playing their game. And it worked - they revealed some lame crap about mouse tracking in the RTG software. RTG states that this is not the case. Pirate has managed to prove his case, the lame "confession" thrown at the window as it were because it's just him trying to get info from the casino. See, the casino was lying. Pirate knew it, so he asked them to elaborate on it. And that's where the casino had to make up even more lies, and finally the lies caught up to them.

 

[Phillitup]

Hi y'all,

Please PLEASE! Stop calling me C.M or CM. There is another webmaster who goes by this handle and it's super confusing. Casinomeister is one word by the way. I have no idea why people try to make it into two words all of the time.



The Pirate broke the rules in the the casino's opinion when he opened his mouth and said that he used a robot. This is on tape and has been broadcast everywhere but here, The breaking of the rule is clear and simple. Now whether or not this rule was ACTUALLY broken we'll probably never know.

What the bottom line is, can RTG tell its casinos what to do? Simple as that. Does RTG have the right to tell what the casino's rules are and what they aren't? Sure, RTG can pull the plug on a licensee, not let him renew their license or whatever, but still the issue is what can RTG dictate to the casino as in how to run their business(es).

AND DON'T CALL ME CHIEF! (Perry White?)

 

[jetset]

It is difficult to understand why doubt still exists over this unproven use of a robot, particularly following the disclosures made by the head RTG techie earlier this week. Not only the content of his posts, but their giving the lie to Hampton claims of technical proof that a robot was used has to be seriously considered.

The Casinomeister did a balanced chronological review of the case backed by diverse emails and that puts things in perspective, too.

Pirate's contested *admission* in the questionable Hampton tape, and his brief braggadochio on the message boards which is wide open to interpretation seems to be what many doubters are now clinging to, and imo Jyde and others have provided acceptable explanations.

Although the winnings of $1.4 million tend to overwhelm the senses, Mary and a number of other respected and knowledgable posters commented well over a week ago that at the levels of wagering used by Pirate and agreed by Hampton it is by no means impossible to achieve this level of success. Irrational to bet at these levels maybe, but not criminal or fraudulent per se.

The latest postings by the Phoenician Casino guy are also very interesting in this regard - he rightly observes that Hampton must have been watching these dangerously high wagering activities in the hope that the Pirate would go down as dramatically as up, and that if they were party to that level of action they have an obligation to pay, all other conditions being in order as now appears to be the case. And it is worth noting that Phoenician have already said they will welcome Pirate at their Caribbean 21 tables, and that autoplay robots are acceptable in this aggressive, negative expectation game.

The unequivocal findings by RTG's technical inspections (and there have been two intensive looks at the technical issues surrounding the Pirate's success)raise another very interesting point.

Now that the Caribbean 21 game has been cleared and is back online, what will Delano Casino do in respect of the serious amount of money (winnings) belonging to Pirate that they froze when Caribean 21 was taken offline? Thus far their name is clean, but they will be judged on what they do from here.

Hampton, following their astonishing admission that they deliberately tried to trick the Pirate into admitting he had a robot, their suggestions of taking other casinos down, their attempts to impose retroactively a ridiculous WT requirement, their failure to supply gaming logs on request, the RTG disclosures which cast Hampton as being economical with the truth, have become damaged goods in my opinion. Their desperate attempts to void this heavy obligation makes me think that their pockets are perhaps not as deep as they claim.

Even assuming they now accept that they have no proof of robot play contrary to their T&Cs, Hampton's future - and Pirate's payouts at $4K a week for the next six and a half years - appears to me to be precarious. That's assuming they return to their payout agreement with Pirate.

 

[aceinhole21]

My bad, folks. But the point remains - this guy was merely grabbing info from Hamptons by playing their game. And it worked - they revealed some lame crap about mouse tracking in the RTG software. RTG states that this is not the case. Pirate has managed to prove his case, the lame "confession" thrown at the window as it were because it's just him trying to get info from the casino. See, the casino was lying. Pirate knew it, so he asked them to elaborate on it. And that's where the casino had to make up even more lies, and finally the lies caught up to them.

I agree with this. Gamlinboi usually posts right on the money. at the time Pirate said this, they had already told him he wasn't getting paid. Although I still say it was dumb for Pirate to make these statements (when he should have known he was on tape), but I believe he is innocent of using a robot. if Pirate didnt say these things, I wonder what excuse or proof hamptons would then have used not to pay. the tape gave them the perfect out which they even posted on their site.

 

[aceinhole21]

The Pirate broke the rules in the the casino's opinion when he opened his mouth and said that he used a robot. This is on tape and has been broadcast everywhere but here, The breaking of the rule is clear and simple. Now whether or not this rule was ACTUALLY broken we'll probably never know.

I can't agree here. The casino stopped paying Pirate BEFORE he said these things. so what rule did he break before then? and saying you broke a rule is not the same as actually breaking one. If I admit to killing someone, but I did not actually do it, I would not be charged with anything (except possibly lying, if that is an offense). Hamptons rules do not say, "player's winnings will be void if he lies."

it is obvious what happened here - Hamptons paid Pirate for awhile to make it look like they intended to pay it all out, but would stop when:

1) Pirate lost the money back (this I think was their main hope, considering their absurd "additional" wagering requirements), but I don't think Pirate was playing any more. or,

2) they could think of some other way out. I really can't say, but I still have my doubts hamptons could handle this debt. I never even heard of them until this.